On Extraction and Synthetic Drugs

[Teotzlcoatl]

Yup.

Tho I don't know what "/thread" means.

 

[Delta-9-THC]

It means "end thread"

 

[Delsyd]

i think its pretty much done too.
Ill keep it open to see if maybe we can get a couple more useful or insightful posts.
If not and it continues this way i have no problem closing it.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

Aw, well don't close it!

I'll keep adding stuff, let me do some reading and make a good informed post or two.

 

[daysonatrain]

i agree with ending this thread. i think teo has made his IDEAS more than clear, and plenty of people have responded with their IDEAS.

one thing, teo, basic research on heroin would show you that it is very benign to the human body (im not talking about addiction and the toll that has), much more so than alcohol. do your research before writing comments off.

your attitude is very off-putting to people on this site, what you have written is your idea, it is not truth. im all for plant etheogens but your way of discounting anything else seems pretty narrow minded to me.

but anyway, at this point the thread is just beating a dead horse.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

That is a thread warning about a mislabeling of a research chemical.

Had it been labeled as what it actually was and people dosed it correctly it would be fine.
Read the end of the thread where people have tried the chemical, knowing what it was and dosing it accordingly.

No negative reports or deaths.

Saying RC's arent safe is not a valid comment.
You CAN use them safely.

I can sticky a thread warning about the dangers of Datura.
That wouldnt make saying "Plants arent safe" a valid comment.

Lets not mess this thread up if you want to discuss this PM me.

Your correct "All plants are safe" is an incorrect statement, in fact is blatantly wrong, many plants can kill you and I never tried to make the point that "all plants are safe".

Why did the RCs get mislabeled? What happened? I read about it.. but forgot.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

one thing, teo, basic research on heroin would show you that it is very benign to the human body (im not talking about addiction and the toll that has), much more so than alcohol. do your research before writing comments off.

your attitude is very off-putting to people on this site, what you have written is your idea, it is not truth. im all for plant etheogens but your way of discounting anything else seems pretty narrow minded to me.

but anyway, at this point the thread is just beating a dead horse.

Your post about heroin is confusing... it is more benign than alcohol, ok i can see that

but it's addiction and what not is bad? but it isnt?

Of course if you take 1 mircodose of heroin it wont hurt you!

im sorry but what do you mean?

but anyway, at this point the thread is just beating a dead horse.

Bear with me... let me make one more point...

Can we all agree that psychoactive plants should be legal?

 

[Shambles]

I'm sure meth and coke doesn't either.

I'm sure they're aren't addictive either and that is just a made up drug-myth too.

Nup. Those are true. Saying heroin causes no physical harm is saying just that - it causes no physical harm. Prohibition kills. It's really that simple.

I'm also finding it hard to find a reason to keep this open.

 

[Delta-9-THC]

What he means is that you could be on heroin for your entire life and nothing will be physically wrong with your body other than the fact that it is dependent on heroin. It does not cause any damage to the brain, liver, heart, etc. Your body will continue to function fine as long as the heroin is clean (which is rare on the black market).

This is in contrast with something like meth or even alcohol which can both cause permanent damage to your nervous system with frequent and extended use.

 

[Roger&Me]

What about bomb making materials? Chemical warfare agents? You really think that making those readily available is a good idea?

Well for the most part, they are readily available. :D

You can fabricate absurdly destructive ordnance from common materials available at your local Home & Garden center. In fact, Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah building in Oklahoma City with commonly available materials-- fertilizer, I believe.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, at some point you gotta accept the fact that people have the potential to easily cause extreme destruction. There's no getting around that fact: human beings can be really friggin' dangerous entities. But you gotta put faith in your fellow human beings, and trust that they won't cause destruction, even if its guaranteed that a few rogues inevitably will. I rather have the freedom that that mindset affords me, than be chained by my own fears.

I guess I'm different than most people, though-- I dislike rules, even if they're for the greater good. Perhaps its naive of me (and it probably is), but I rather let people be free, and put up with whatever situation that creates, than chain people with rules in order to feel more secure. It just seems to me like a cowardly way to live.

Anyways, thats just my opinion.

 

[solistus]

I'm still curious how you think all plants should be legal if you think drugs that are dangerous and addictive should be illegal. What about the many dangerous and addictive plants? I agree that they should be legal - for the exact same reason I believe all drugs should be. If heroin should be banned because it's too dangerous and too tempting to misuse, why not opium itself? Heroin is just a semi-synthetic, more potent variant of morphine, which is by all definitions a natural drug. Should heroin dealers go to jail but morphine dealers be allowed? That makes no sense.

It's completely against the principles of harms reduction to advocate legal sanctions as a way to fight "bad" drugs. It never has worked to curb use and it never will. Frankly, if you believe it does, you're either delusional, on the DEA payroll or very, very unintelligent. The amount of empirical evidence showing that prohibition fails to reduce use is simply overwhelming. Every credible study on the topic has reached the same conclusion, including a few sponsored by the US government.

Banning distilled alcohol while allowing beer and wine is even more ridiculous. It's the same fucking drug. How is it any less dangerous if it's diluted in water? Can I have my synthetic drugs too, since I dilute them in solution as well? That's a completely nonsensical distinction to avoid admitting that we already tried alcohol prohibition and it failed miserably, causing exactly the things most of us here believe illegalising any drug will inevitably cause - less safe use, massive profits for violent criminals and an undermining of trust in the very public institutions best served to promote harms reduction.

If medically pure heroin were injected into someone regularly by a trained nurse or doctor who wouldn't screw up the veins, the only negative side effect most people would experience is addiction. Any legal prohibition only produces risks of impure material and improper injection, BY FAR the two biggest risks posed by heroin addiction now. Legalising it would make it go from 'probably causing permanent vein damage and might kill you' to 'pretty much harmless beyond habituation'. If you want to ban every addictive activity other people might want to do "for their own good", well, I have a word for people like you, and it involves the political philosophy of Benito Mussolini (to avoid outright Godwinning the thread).

BTW - admitting defeat and then continuing to argue just makes you look more stubborn and delusional and makes your ideas seem even more utterly lacking in merit.

 

[Delta-9-THC]

Well for the most part, they are readily available. :D

You can fabricate absurdly destructive ordnance from common materials available at your local Home & Garden center. In fact, Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah building in Oklahoma City with commonly available materials-- fertilizer, I believe.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, at some point you gotta accept the fact that people have the potential to easily cause extreme destruction. There's no getting around that fact: human beings can be really friggin' dangerous entities. But you gotta put faith in your fellow human beings, and trust that they won't cause destruction, even if its guaranteed that a few rogues inevitably will. I rather have the freedom that that mindset affords me, than be chained by my own fears.

I guess I'm different than most people, though-- I dislike rules, even if they're for the greater good. Perhaps its naive of me (and it probably is), but I rather let people be free, and put up with whatever situation that creates, than chain people with rules in order to feel more secure. It just seems to me like a cowardly way to live.

Anyways, thats just my opinion.

Cool. I definitely understand the mindset and in an ideal world this would be the case. I just see no benefit to giving people more options for destruction than they already have unless it is for a very good reason. I guess I have a slightly more pessimistic view of human nature.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

What about the many dangerous and addictive plants?

The plant themselves would be legal but I never said ingesting them would be.

Basically... if it were up to me.... living plants, viable seeds and unadulterated dried botanicals (meaning whole botanicals basically, no preparation, etc.) would be legal and everything else would be "fair game" (as somebody here put it) for illegalization IF there was a need presented for it to become illegal (such as people overdosing or something).

Think about this.... you can grow all the Cannabis you want, but you can't make hash and sell it.

This way the cops are "keeping the streets clean" and the responsible drug user can still use if he does so discreetly in his own home or other safe place.

Also... it's easy for any idiot to ask himself... "Is this a plant?" (Basically, Is this legal?)

I guess what I'm trying to say is, at some point you gotta accept the fact that people have the potential to easily cause extreme destruction. There's no getting around that fact: human beings can be really friggin' dangerous entities. But you gotta put faith in your fellow human beings, and trust that they won't cause destruction, even if its guaranteed that a few rogues inevitably will. I rather have the freedom that that mindset affords me, than be chained by my own fears.

I guess I'm different than most people, though-- I dislike rules, even if they're for the greater good. Perhaps its naive of me (and it probably is), but I rather let people be free, and put up with whatever situation that creates, than chain people with rules in order to feel more secure. It just seems to me like a cowardly way to live.

a wonderful post. excellent, really. I enjoyed reading that.

I tend to agree.

What I am offering here is a STEP in the right direction.

I believe most of us can agree that all plants should be legal, even most of the "average" or "normal" people can agree with that.

With that in mind... isn't the legalization of plants the first step in ending the drug war? As well as the most feasible and easily implemented option?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BTW what I meant by decriminalization is that anybody caught with a "personal amount" (whatever that may be) of narcotics is simply sent to rehab and has their drugs taken.

People with over that amount would go to jail for a LONG time.

If all plants were legal (tons of other psychoactive available besides alcohol) and we implemented the above ideas then I believe everyone but the most vile, hedonistic humans would not use hard narcotics...

I am so fucking rambling...

To continue... Fucking Americans need to get off anti-depressants and prescriptive narcotics along with all the street narcotics... boy we love our feel good drugs, don't we?

Banning distilled alcohol while allowing beer and wine is even more ridiculous. It's the same fucking drug. How is it any less dangerous if it's diluted in water? Can I have my synthetic drugs too, since I dilute them in solution as well? That's a completely nonsensical distinction to avoid admitting that we already tried alcohol prohibition and it failed miserably, causing exactly the things most of us here believe illegalising any drug will inevitably cause - less safe use, massive profits for violent criminals and an undermining of trust in the very public institutions best served to promote harms reduction.

I could go either way on that one, but the logic was... beer and wine are natural and distilled spirits are not.

Also, it's easy to see that distilled spirits are more harmful than beer and wine, most deaths occur with distilled alcohol instead of beer or wine.

But... again, that could go either way.

If medically pure heroin were injected into someone regularly by a trained nurse or doctor who wouldn't screw up the veins, the only negative side effect most people would experience is addiction.

ok? im totally for heroin in the hands of trained doctors or medical professional. I think scientist and doctors should be able to get their hands on ANYTHING.

We're talking about it being legal or illegal for your average citizen.

Look the plant-drugs I'm talking about... Ayahuasca, Peyote, etc. can't kill you NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO! Those are the kinds of drugs that are SAFE! That have been used for 10,000 years (as in the case of Ayahuasca) without a single reported death!

You CANNOT compare the safety of Heroin to that of Peyote or Ayahuasca! Get outta here with that craziness! Things are not black and white but if they were it would look like this-

Heroin = dangerous

Peyote = safe

Come to think of it somebody did die from peyote... he was an alcoholic who CHOKED on the actual button.

 

[swilow]

Aw, well don't close it!

I'll keep adding stuff, let me do some reading and make a good informed post or two.

Great, your gonna keep adding stuff.

Essentially, your insulting people, using a flawed system of drug-safety-profiling (can you not read that you wrote "habitat-forming"???), are obviously not informed about many drugs and have no evidence for most of the claims you make.\

Heroin is not harmful, in itself. When used correctly, it is benign. Meth is neurotxic, but so is aspartame; limiting your use is the key. Cocaine is relatively safe, when used carefully.

Your simply not proving anything at all, except your apparently limted knowledge. I love plants; I am currently sipping on a tea of peppermint, scullcap, valerian, catnip and strawberry leaf. Most tasty and relaxing. However, your simply being a troll; you have no data behind you, except your opinion. Thats fine, but your rudeness and ignorance is disturbing.

Seems like the plants ain't taught you anything. I feel sorry for you really.

I could go either way on that one, but the logic was... beer and wine are natural and distilled spirits are not.

How are beer and wine natural? They very rarely produce themselves, just for kicks. If they are natural, then so are distilled sprits. Alcohol is alcohol.

 

[solistus]

you're*

Sorry swilow, couldn't help it

Sounds like a tasty tea, btw. This apple-strawberry-banana smoothie may lack psychoactivity but it sure is tasty, and my stomach appreciates not being treated like a landfill for questionable fast food eating decisions, for a night at least

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

How are beer and wine natural? They very rarely produce themselves, just for kicks.

Ever heard of animals getting drunk?

I suppose elephants and worthogs ferment their own beer and wine?

Beer and wine may occur naturally but distilled alcohol sure as hell doesn't and it doesn't have a long history of human usage, but hey, I'm drinking Absinthe right now... so...

Read a book about animals and psychoactives

My knowledge is limited outside of flora and fauna and a few other subject.

Heroin is not harmful, in itself. When used correctly, it is benign.

Again... things like Cannabis and Peyote are benign whatever the hell you do with them. Just don't choke

Trout notes a subject that ingested 8 GRAMS (yes, grams, as in 8000mg) of pure mescaline, the experience was not noted, but it was stated that the subject lived and experienced no injury or ill effect.

This is my smoking night if you can't tell....

Sorry for the rambling.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

Again I apperciate every in participating, you give me a lot to think about, put some holes in my argument, I'll have to sew closed and ill have to reevaluate some of my ideas.

 

[Shambles]

BTW what I meant by decriminalization is that anybody caught with a "personal amount" (whatever that may be) of narcotics is simply sent to rehab and has their drugs taken.

People with over that amount would go to jail for a LONG time.

Where do the people get their personal amounts of drugs when all the people with enough to sell on are in jail for a LONG time? And how does enforced rehab work exactly?

If all plants were legal (tons of other psychoactive available besides alcohol) and we implemented the above ideas then I believe everyone but the most vile, hedonistic humans would not use hard narcotics...

Started so well. Then had to get in there with that nasty sideswipe you're so fond of. I'm occasionally hedonistic. Rarely vile.

I am so fucking rambling...

Rambling has it's place. Just try to leave the ill-informed vitriol behind.

Fucking Americans need to get off anti-depressants and prescriptive narcotics along with all the street narcotics... boy we love our feel good drugs, don't we?

Do you even know what a narcotic is? Other than that I have some sympathy. Western societies tend to rely on quick fixes a bit too much, in my opinion. But there also nothing wrong with wanting to just feel good sometimes.

Come to think of it somebody did die from peyote... he was an alcoholic who CHOKED on the actual button.

That's not what the post mortem found. And there are other examples - you're just rather selective in what you include.

We're talking about it being legal or illegal for your average citizen.

Could you try to be just a bit more condescending. Maybe add slightly more patronising tone. Really helps you get your point across.

 

[swilow]

Ever heard of animals getting drunk?

I suppose elephants and worthogs ferment their own beer and wine?

Beer and wine may occur naturally but distilled alcohol sure as hell doesn't and it doesn't have a long history of human usage, but hey, I'm drinking Absinthe right now... so...

Your a hypocrite...

Of course I know that anmals get drunk, but to say that fermented fruit is the same as wine is ridiculous. Its fermented fruit. Rather different. Wine is created through the intentional action of fermenting sugars in various fruit and grain products, as determined by human's; fermented fruit occurrs when fruit begins to rot, as is par for the course in organic structures.

Wine is created using yeasts and grapes; the two are rarely combined in nature.

Distilled alcohol has a 3000 year history:

Read this.

A 3000 year history does not imply safety anyhow.

 

[greenmeanies]

Basically... if it were up to me.... living plants, viable seeds and unadulterated dried botanicals (meaning whole botanicals basically, no preparation, etc.) would be legal

so dried nugz are ok (can ingest), live cacti are ok (cannot ingest) dried rootbark ok (cannot ingest), dried shrooms ok (can ingest), ayahuasca not ok (preparation), beer ok (can ingest), poppies ok (cannot ingest) opium not ok (preparation)...

on the subject of distilled alcohol, ethanol is much more than just a drug when distilled. it is a useful solvent and easily portable fuel that can be produced by anyone from plant matter

and don't tell me you can allow it for personal preparation, but "you can't sell it" bullhonkey. the ability to trade goods AND services is an essential right as much as doing the drugs themselves.